Traditionally, migrant/diasporic populations have been considered as marketplace minorities, while mainstream populations were regarded as dominant majority.
Emergence of the two research streams (ethnic marketing and international marketing) reviewed above indicates that marketing approaches to these groups were regarded as separate managerial tasks. However, considerable growth in the numbers of ethnic minority populations, and the continuing efforts of social policy makers to promote racial equality have led to a greater integration of ethnic minorities with mainstream populations. For example, according to population projections for the USA, by 2050 the currently dominant (i.e. white) ethnic group will remain constant in size, while other ethnic groups will grow considerably (Shrestha, 2006; Haub, 2008). Similarly,
49 according to a recent report on population projections in the UK (Wohland et al., 2010), by 2051, ethnic minorities will make up 20% of the total population (rising from 8% in 2001). According to the same projections, ethnic minority groups will be significantly less segregated from the majority populations and significantly more affluent than at present.
The integration of migrant minorities with mainstream populations also results in a significant rise in mixed-ethnic or mixed race families. Mixed ethnic and multiracial groups are reportedly emerging as the largest growing population segment in the USA, UK and many other countries across the world (Aspinall, 2003; Clark and Mass, 2009).
It is worth noting that long-term statistical information on the mixed-ethnic populations is scarce: the 1990 USA census and the 1991 UK Census did not provide individuals an opportunity to report all the ethnic/heritage groups they identify with. While some of the 1990-1991 data is used as a benchmark in ethnic identity studies, the 2000 (USA) 2001 (UK) Census was the first of its kind that presented individuals with an opportunity to identify themselves as members of several racial categories and subethnicities (Waters, 2008). However, several other studies shed some light on the growth projections.4
According to Spencer et al. (2000), in the USA multiracial births increase at a much faster rate than monoracial births, while interracial dating and marriages have also been on the rise since 1960s to date. Most remarkably, the multiracial marriages in the USA increased by 20% from the year 2000 (Frey and Myers 2002; Frey, 2009; El Nasser, 2010), specifically:
In 2007, 7.7% of the total number of marriages in the USA were mixed race
4 While this research analyses evidence from two countries, USA and UK, similar evidence is reported for many other countries, such as Canada, Netherlands, Finland etc. See, for example, the address of David Coleman (University of Oxford) at The British Society for Population Studies Annual Conference, September 2004.
http://www.spsw.ox.ac.uk/fileadmin/documents/pdf/Migration_in_the_21st_century_a_third_demographi c_transition_in_the_making.ppt
http://www2.lse.ac.uk/socialPolicy/BSPS/annualConference/2004/conf2004.aspx#generated-subheading1
50
Thirty-six states had at least a 20% increase in mixed-race marriages since 2000, including Florida, Virginia and Texas. A fifth of marriages in California and New Mexico were mixed.
About 9% of marriages involving non-Hispanic whites are mixed
About 1 in 3 marriages involving Hispanics or Asians are mixed-race
Almost one of six marriages involving Africans are mixed-race
A similar trend is emerging in the UK, registering a remarkable increase of individuals of either in a mixed-ethnic (or mixed-race) relationship or of mixed or multiple heritage (Platt, 2009; Waters, 2008), some of the examples are:
48 % of Black Caribbean men and 34 % of Black Caribbean women are in mixed race relationships
5.7% of Indian men and 4.3% of Pakistani men are married to a white
11% of Chinese men and 25% of Chinese women are married to a white
The number of children of mixed heritage increased from 1995 to 2009 from 39% to 49% (Carribean and white parent); from 3% to 11% (Indian and white parent); from 15% to 35% (Chinese and white parent) and from 1% to 4%
(Pakistani and white parent).
The complexities of multi-racial and/or mixed-ethnic individuals’ upbringing are reflected in their identity processes. Research on self-identification dimensions of multi-racial and/or mixed-ethnic individuals asserts that individuals consider all ethnic components of their identity of equal importance. For example, Johnson et al. (1997) note that multi-racial individuals “expressed negative emotional reactions to their common experience of forced categorisation into a single racial group or relegation to a residual "Other-specify" category...and... also volunteered a preference for a choice – that they be allowed to identify each of their multiple racial backgrounds” (p8). Spencer et al. (2000) note that the growth of multi-racial populations challenges researchers to acknowledge the increasing complexities of ethnic identities and to explore how membership of several ethnic groups affects behaviours.
Echoing this remarkable shift in the cultural composition of societies, studies from
51 anthropology and sociology assert that the increasing co-existence and mixing of many cultures and subcultures within a given locale calls for further scholarly research into the meaning of ‘local’ in cultural discourse (Korff, 2003; Roudometof, 2005; Murray 2007). Indeed, if a number of subcultural groups co-reside and mix in a given country, which culture would be considered as local to them? Thus, taking the cultural localisation perspective as a conceptual standpoint, local culture (LC) is defined as (see also Kipnis et al., 2014): a culture of one’s current place of residence, i.e. a system of meanings (values, ways of life, symbols) existing in a given locale which is regarded by those residing in this locale as originating in the locale and uniquely distinguishing this locale from other locales (for example, in France – French culture etc). Within this definition, the conception of ‘localness’ is not grounded in the notion of a nation (which may be multicultural in composition) but rather is delineated as a set of meanings held as unique to the locale by the locale’s residents. Thus, one’s deployment of Local Culture to derive sense of self reflects the localised aspect of identity construal rather than nationality/ethnicity.
2.4.2.2 The Rise of Affiliative Identification: Distinguishing and Defining